Printable View
one belt for each weight class like in the old days and the scrapping of alphabet titles ? What would it take for it to happen ? And no more bloody catchweight fights ? If you're too small to go up in that weight then dont. If you want to fight a welterweight let him fight at his natural weight. Mayweather actually fighting a proper welterweight ?
No. Just like everything else in the world, business is more coplex and moderation no longer exists. Hundreds of boxing organizations, 4+ champions per division, hell theres a fast food restaurant on every street corner. Its all about being number one an making the most money. Greed. Every organization wants to be #1, the most prestigious, so they would never join forces with another.
A federal boxing commission in the states that only recognized one belt and only allowed sanctioning fees for that belt would essentially destroy the alphabets. Sure they could operate outside of the US but if you if a fighter can't wear your belt to the ring in Vegas the worth of it is meaningless.
it can only go one way... worse... look at the fucking WBC "diamond belt" for catchweight... even though a catchweight would always fall into a weight class they have brough this shit in for more sanctioning money... MMA will never replace boxing, but because of the way it is rum and the fucked up no rules boxing has it will suck the life out of this once great sport.
Unfortunately no.Too much money,networks wanting "mega fights/events" & too many people with a hand in the till.
This is an unbelievably easy question to answer, no. As for catchweights no and its not like their a brand new thing anyway.
No. Boxers love straps!
And make it illegal for anyone else to offer up title belts? Or rich purses? It's one thing for the government to recognize only one body, It's something else altogether to force everyone else to recognise it. Can you honestly see the government making it illegal to set up rival sanctioning bodies? Or making it illegal for fighters to fight for They would no more do that than they would pass a law making it illegal to start up a new football league, or a new hockey league. Nor should they.Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChilds
No, the sanctioning bodies are here to stay and there will always be multiple belts.
What we can hope for is that more and more top fighters will ignore sanctioning body belts and will focus more on fighting the biggest name opponents for more money instead of fighting worthless mandatory challengers just to hang on to a belt.
I think most hardcore boxing fans would welcome that. But the problem is, there isn't enough big names. to keep the general public interested. Without the draw of the phrase "title fight". You lose a lot of interest from the general public, and boxing can't really afford that.Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
You have a great point. Even though all boxing fans don't like the organizational nonsense, it can be much worse. Just take a look at MMA where teh UFC has an almost monopoly on the sport. Their biggest stars only make a few hundred grand compared to the biggest stars in boxing and those guys take considerable risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by CGMAnd make it illegal for anyone else to offer up title belts? Or rich purses? It's one thing for the government to recognize only one body, It's something else altogether to force everyone else to recognise it. Can you honestly see the government making it illegal to set up rival sanctioning bodies? Or making it illegal for fighters to fight for They would no more do that than they would pass a law making it illegal to start up a new football league, or a new hockey league. Nor should they.Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChilds
First of all I didn't say it was plausible. The OP asked what would cause the Alphabets to go away and I offered the only possible way I could think of this happening. A federal commision could simply only recognize the Ring belt then there would be no sanctioning fees at all. I don't really see how limiting it to only one belt in the US would damper purses at all. Managers/Promoters/Venues/TV/Public are what make mega deals happen not the shmucks at the WBC/WBA etc. I don't recall fighters prior to the proliferation of belts and orgs complaining about their paychecks nor would they now. Boxing could use a good dose of regulation considering its state.Quote:
Originally Posted by CGMAnd make it illegal for anyone else to offer up title belts? Or rich purses? It's one thing for the government to recognize only one body, It's something else altogether to force everyone else to recognise it. Can you honestly see the government making it illegal to set up rival sanctioning bodies? Or making it illegal for fighters to fight for They would no more do that than they would pass a law making it illegal to start up a new football league, or a new hockey league. Nor should they.Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChilds
How is the UFC putting on 1-2 fight cards a month comprised of 10 fights and usually exactly the fights the fans want to see for the same price boxing charges for PPV's consisting of 1 to 3 fights tops, not good for the fans?Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogYou have a great point. Even though all boxing fans don't like the organizational nonsense, it can be much worse. Just take a look at MMA where teh UFC has an almost monopoly on the sport. Their biggest stars only make a few hundred grand compared to the biggest stars in boxing and those guys take considerable risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by CGMAnd make it illegal for anyone else to offer up title belts? Or rich purses? It's one thing for the government to recognize only one body, It's something else altogether to force everyone else to recognise it. Can you honestly see the government making it illegal to set up rival sanctioning bodies? Or making it illegal for fighters to fight for They would no more do that than they would pass a law making it illegal to start up a new football league, or a new hockey league. Nor should they.Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChilds
Yes and the sugar plumb fairy will hand out free candy ,for all of us who live in magic land !Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughesd
It's not. I'm sure it's great for them. But lets see where these MMA fighters are 10 years down the line. Broken and struggling for money cuz they made chump change in there prime years. The fact that Brock Leshner made more as a WWE character than he does now is actually pretty fukking sad.Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChildsHow is the UFC putting on 1-2 fight cards a month comprised of 10 fights and usually exactly the fights the fans want to see for the same price boxing charges for PPV's consisting of 1 to 3 fights tops, not good for the fans?Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldogYou have a great point. Even though all boxing fans don't like the organizational nonsense, it can be much worse. Just take a look at MMA where teh UFC has an almost monopoly on the sport. Their biggest stars only make a few hundred grand compared to the biggest stars in boxing and those guys take considerable risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by CGM
I think Sweetpea hit the nail on the head about fighters ignoring the alphabet idiots & making fights the fans want to see!Quote:
Originally Posted by CGMI think most hardcore boxing fans would welcome that. But the problem is, there isn't enough big names. to keep the general public interested. Without the draw of the phrase "title fight". You lose a lot of interest from the general public, and boxing can't really afford that.Quote:
Originally Posted by SweetPea
CGM is correct in a sense that the general public maybe fooled by the phrase 'title fight' but if boxing continues to match the best against the best & makes quality match-ups then it can only help the sport.
I truly hope/d Cotto & Pacquiao tell Jose where he can shove that diamond piece of sh*t! Who needs it? Its a great fight, that's the bottom line, no title just 2 top guys going at it... just what I like to see!!!
I tell you what check the status of the last few MMA orgs that attempted to outspend the UFC for fighters. Bodog, EliteXC, IFL and Affliction? All are closed for business. Fighter salaries that are posted do not include the shit load of money they get from sponsors who often are procured through the UFC. Sure 45K is peanuts compared some boxing paydays but its not boxing so why yall expect the pay to be on par I dont understand and to make that pay day 3-4 times a year is 3-4 times more than I make a year getting shot at. Taking sponorship, owning their own gyms and fighter salaries I doubt you will see a lot of top MMA fighters "broke and struggling" ten years from now. Some of you guys kill me with this pay thing. Yall bash the sport as not being close to as good as boxing and devoid of talent and world class athletes then want to suggest they should get comparable pay. Its one or the other gents.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseIt's not. I'm sure it's great for them. But lets see where these MMA fighters are 10 years down the line. Broken and struggling for money cuz they made chump change in there prime years. The fact that Brock Leshner made more as a WWE character than he does now is actually pretty fukking sad.Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChildsHow is the UFC putting on 1-2 fight cards a month comprised of 10 fights and usually exactly the fights the fans want to see for the same price boxing charges for PPV's consisting of 1 to 3 fights tops, not good for the fans?Quote:
Originally Posted by generalbulldog
ok fair enough, I thought you were offering it up as a solution, and I was just saying there is no way the US government would, or should, do that. But no big deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChildsFirst of all I didn't say it was plausible. The OP asked what would cause the Alphabets to go away and I offered the only possible way I could think of this happening. A federal commision could simply only recognize the Ring belt then there would be no sanctioning fees at all. I don't really see how limiting it to only one belt in the US would damper purses at all. Managers/Promoters/Venues/TV/Public are what make mega deals happen not the shmucks at the WBC/WBA etc. I don't recall fighters prior to the proliferation of belts and orgs complaining about their paychecks nor would they now. Boxing could use a good dose of regulation considering its state.Quote:
Originally Posted by CGMAnd make it illegal for anyone else to offer up title belts? Or rich purses? It's one thing for the government to recognize only one body, It's something else altogether to force everyone else to recognise it. Can you honestly see the government making it illegal to set up rival sanctioning bodies? Or making it illegal for fighters to fight for They would no more do that than they would pass a law making it illegal to start up a new football league, or a new hockey league. Nor should they.Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChilds
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughesd
Sadly no.
IMO its boxing biggest problem that has made boxing a second class sport in the general publics eyes.
In an ideal world of course we would all want one belt per division, but this isn't an ideal world. In the world we actually inhabit i think two belts per division would be best. 4 is bullshit, but 2 stops a powerful promoter getting hold of the division. Imagine if we just had the WBC? Don King would run boxing. 2 creates an element of competition (in a business sense) and stops one promoter tying up a whole division but at the same time is more transperant, more accessible to the public and a purer form of sport. So, with how boxing/humans are in reality 2 titiles in each division would be best. But as i have said, in an ideal world it would be one.
What about a blonde-haired and blue-eyed heavyweight champion from the United States of America?
No chance.
Like in Boxing and every other sport the big names ain't the problem. I'm sure fighters like Randy Couture, Quinton Jackson and Tito Ortiz eat very well and will be looked after once they retire. But what about the rest? You going to tell me sponsors are giving big money to fighters like Heath Herring and Jake O'Brien? Come on now. If the top dogs are getting around $250,000 what the fukk are they getting? Or is it that they don't count?Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChildsI tell you what check the status of the last few MMA orgs that attempted to outspend the UFC for fighters. Bodog, EliteXC, IFL and Affliction? All are closed for business. Fighter salaries that are posted do not include the shit load of money they get from sponsors who often are procured through the UFC. Sure 45K is peanuts compared some boxing paydays but its not boxing so why yall expect the pay to be on par I dont understand and to make that pay day 3-4 times a year is 3-4 times more than I make a year getting shot at. Taking sponorship, owning their own gyms and fighter salaries I doubt you will see a lot of top MMA fighters "broke and struggling" ten years from now. Some of you guys kill me with this pay thing. Yall bash the sport as not being close to as good as boxing and devoid of talent and world class athletes then want to suggest they should get comparable pay. Its one or the other gents.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseIt's not. I'm sure it's great for them. But lets see where these MMA fighters are 10 years down the line. Broken and struggling for money cuz they made chump change in there prime years. The fact that Brock Leshner made more as a WWE character than he does now is actually pretty fukking sad.Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChilds
I think we'll see one title per weight division (but more than eight divisions) at some point in a decade or three, probably closer to three. For it to happen boxing will have to decline a lot in popularity from where it is now to the extent that investors form a UFC-style organisation and sign all the top talent up. And it'll be really good. We'll have constant Super Six-style tournaments going on in each weight division. For boxing to get better it'll have to get worse first and luckily we've got just the right bunch of guys running the industry to make sure that'll happen.
VD,Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseLike in Boxing and every other sport the big names ain't the problem. I'm sure fighters like Randy Couture, Quinton Jackson and Tito Ortiz eat very well and will be looked after once they retire. But what about the rest? You going to tell me sponsors are giving big money to fighters like Heath Herring and Jake O'Brien? Come on now. If the top dogs are getting around $250,000 what the fukk are they getting? Or is it that they don't count?Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChildsI tell you what check the status of the last few MMA orgs that attempted to outspend the UFC for fighters. Bodog, EliteXC, IFL and Affliction? All are closed for business. Fighter salaries that are posted do not include the shit load of money they get from sponsors who often are procured through the UFC. Sure 45K is peanuts compared some boxing paydays but its not boxing so why yall expect the pay to be on par I dont understand and to make that pay day 3-4 times a year is 3-4 times more than I make a year getting shot at. Taking sponorship, owning their own gyms and fighter salaries I doubt you will see a lot of top MMA fighters "broke and struggling" ten years from now. Some of you guys kill me with this pay thing. Yall bash the sport as not being close to as good as boxing and devoid of talent and world class athletes then want to suggest they should get comparable pay. Its one or the other gents.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent Demise
I think your being a little impatient. MMA as we know it basically started in 1992 and didn't really start to pick up speed till Zuffa bought it in 2001 who didn't really start seeing a real return on their investment till 2005-2006. The pay has gradually increased and I think we will continue to see it rise. When you look at the meteoric success of the UFC in the past years, sure you would think they are being cheap, but then when you look at the business models who have paid big money and then failed maybe not. Jay Heiron recently was quoted at being very upset at not fighting on the canceled Affliction card. He specifically mentioned that his sponsors only paid when he fought. He didn't mention what he would have been paid by Affliction. Lets for argument sake say a dark card fighter on a UFC show gets 5k from sponsors and 10k to show from the UFC. Thats 15k (not counting win/KO/Sub bonuses), multiplied by 4 fights a year thats 60k annually. Sure not a salary that one will go out and buy a yacht with but not doing too bad either. MMA is still a young and small sport relative to others, as it grows so will the salaries that both the superstars and lesser fighters make. I think it says something that the public is always bringing up the pay and not the fighters. Maybe they know something we don't.
when dicks like Dana White constantly gloat on and on about the money being made, then pays the ones making him the money close to shit for their work, it says quite a bit, hell the asshole doesn't even let fighters make money off of their own name if the packaging doesn't have UFC stamped on it and he gets a cut of the profit, yea they get sponsors, but they still need to pay their corners, they still need to pay bills from their training camp, and then basically get paid shit to do so, and are also expected to be able to live off of itQuote:
Originally Posted by VanChildsVD,Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseLike in Boxing and every other sport the big names ain't the problem. I'm sure fighters like Randy Couture, Quinton Jackson and Tito Ortiz eat very well and will be looked after once they retire. But what about the rest? You going to tell me sponsors are giving big money to fighters like Heath Herring and Jake O'Brien? Come on now. If the top dogs are getting around $250,000 what the fukk are they getting? Or is it that they don't count?Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChilds
I think your being a little impatient. MMA as we know it basically started in 1992 and didn't really start to pick up speed till Zuffa bought it in 2001 who didn't really start seeing a real return on their investment till 2005-2006. The pay has gradually increased and I think we will continue to see it rise. When you look at the meteoric success of the UFC in the past years, sure you would think they are being cheap, but then when you look at the business models who have paid big money and then failed maybe not. Jay Heiron recently was quoted at being very upset at not fighting on the canceled Affliction card. He specifically mentioned that his sponsors only paid when he fought. He didn't mention what he would have been paid by Affliction. Lets for argument sake say a dark card fighter on a UFC show gets 5k from sponsors and 10k to show from the UFC. Thats 15k (not counting win/KO/Sub bonuses), multiplied by 4 fights a year thats 60k annually. Sure not a salary that one will go out and buy a yacht with but not doing too bad either. MMA is still a young and small sport relative to others, as it grows so will the salaries that both the superstars and lesser fighters make. I think it says something that the public is always bringing up the pay and not the fighters. Maybe they know something we don't.
You forgot to subtract the normal taxes and I'm sure there's some type of trainer or agent taking a cut as well. That 60k sounds more like 35kQuote:
Originally Posted by VanChildsVD,Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseLike in Boxing and every other sport the big names ain't the problem. I'm sure fighters like Randy Couture, Quinton Jackson and Tito Ortiz eat very well and will be looked after once they retire. But what about the rest? You going to tell me sponsors are giving big money to fighters like Heath Herring and Jake O'Brien? Come on now. If the top dogs are getting around $250,000 what the fukk are they getting? Or is it that they don't count?Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChilds
I think your being a little impatient. MMA as we know it basically started in 1992 and didn't really start to pick up speed till Zuffa bought it in 2001 who didn't really start seeing a real return on their investment till 2005-2006. The pay has gradually increased and I think we will continue to see it rise. When you look at the meteoric success of the UFC in the past years, sure you would think they are being cheap, but then when you look at the business models who have paid big money and then failed maybe not. Jay Heiron recently was quoted at being very upset at not fighting on the canceled Affliction card. He specifically mentioned that his sponsors only paid when he fought. He didn't mention what he would have been paid by Affliction. Lets for argument sake say a dark card fighter on a UFC show gets 5k from sponsors and 10k to show from the UFC. Thats 15k (not counting win/KO/Sub bonuses), multiplied by 4 fights a year thats 60k annually. Sure not a salary that one will go out and buy a yacht with but not doing too bad either. MMA is still a young and small sport relative to others, as it grows so will the salaries that both the superstars and lesser fighters make. I think it says something that the public is always bringing up the pay and not the fighters. Maybe they know something we don't.
Just like every other American that pays taxes and has expenses. No one forces these guys to do this for a living nor forces them to fight in the UFC. Once again when fighters not internet posters with and axe to grind start complaining about their money I'll start taking it seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseYou forgot to subtract the normal taxes and I'm sure there's some type of trainer or agent taking a cut as well. That 60k sounds more like 35kQuote:
Originally Posted by VanChildsVD,Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent Demise
I think your being a little impatient. MMA as we know it basically started in 1992 and didn't really start to pick up speed till Zuffa bought it in 2001 who didn't really start seeing a real return on their investment till 2005-2006. The pay has gradually increased and I think we will continue to see it rise. When you look at the meteoric success of the UFC in the past years, sure you would think they are being cheap, but then when you look at the business models who have paid big money and then failed maybe not. Jay Heiron recently was quoted at being very upset at not fighting on the canceled Affliction card. He specifically mentioned that his sponsors only paid when he fought. He didn't mention what he would have been paid by Affliction. Lets for argument sake say a dark card fighter on a UFC show gets 5k from sponsors and 10k to show from the UFC. Thats 15k (not counting win/KO/Sub bonuses), multiplied by 4 fights a year thats 60k annually. Sure not a salary that one will go out and buy a yacht with but not doing too bad either. MMA is still a young and small sport relative to others, as it grows so will the salaries that both the superstars and lesser fighters make. I think it says something that the public is always bringing up the pay and not the fighters. Maybe they know something we don't.
To get back on topic. When I need to validate of an importance of a fight of why I'm not going out with friends and family, I tell them it's a "title fight" people are starting to catch on though saying things like "Is there always a title on the line on tv fights" or "They are all title fights"
Government intervention in sport is something I'm opposed to. The belts come, go, get stripped, get handed over it's just part of the story line, not the story itself. If someone wants to follow the real rankings follow either the Ring Rankings, or if you don't trust those anymore go with our own Saddoboxing rankings where you have to earn your spot by beating someone. No way in hell any commission is going to say "nope we've made enough money, time to do the right thing"
No axe to grind. If you can't see the problem on the horizon that's on you. Hell, maybe you can see the problem and just don't care. If you want to tell me "I enjoy watching the UFC for the entertainment. But really it's of no concearn what becomes of the fighters afterwards" that's fine too.Quote:
Originally Posted by VanChildsJust like every other American that pays taxes and has expenses. No one forces these guys to do this for a living nor forces them to fight in the UFC. Once again when fighters not internet posters with and axe to grind start complaining about their money I'll start taking it seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseYou forgot to subtract the normal taxes and I'm sure there's some type of trainer or agent taking a cut as well. That 60k sounds more like 35kQuote:
Originally Posted by VanChilds
Big pay days and all the list of boxers both elite and bottom rung that ended up in dire straits is not short by any stretch. I just think w/o the knowledge of what the UFC is making and its overhead, what other compensation the fighters are also making and the fact that no MMA business model has succeded by paying big salaries some are making a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions.
The sport would need to transform for that to happen.
The sport "prize fighting" i.e. "Boxing" is not centered around a single promoter, a single sanctioning body and a single government body using one set of rules granting fighters license to fight in their territory. The only stage where this can occur is the Olympics.
Nope never.